Do you agree with the ontological argument for god’s existence? Why or why not?
1. Introduction
For the vast majority of human history our intellectual power has been directed at trying to prove the existence of gods, I will be looking at an argument for god/s existence called the Ontological argument. I will start by giving the history of this argument and how it was built, and then I will be giving my own personal opinion on the ontological argument.
2.1 What is an ontological argument?
The ontological argument is an argument that uses ontology to prove the existence of God; ontological arguments use the nature of existence to argue in favor of certain conclusions. They start with an “a priori” theory about the nature of existence, and then …show more content…
2.2.1 St. Anselm
The first of these Ontological arguments was put forward by St. Anselm in 1078 in his work the Proslogion. Anselm defined God as “the greatest possible thing that could be thought”, and argued that this being must exist in the mind even if for the purpose of refutation. He then argues that if the greatest possible being can exist as an idea then it must also exist in reality, in order for God to be the greatest possible being he must exist in both the mind and reality, if God only existed in the mind then a greater being must exist in both reality and the mind, he believed this means God must exist in reality.
The second argument he puts forward is only slightly different, God is a being that is greater than any other imaginable, a being that has the property of existence is greater than a being that does not. If God exists in the mind but not in reality, then we can imagine a greater being than god, we cannot imagine a being greater than God, so if God exists in our mind then God must exist in reality. God does exist in our mind, so he must exist in reality. A being that nothing could be greater than, cannot be conceived to not exist, this means it must …show more content…
He uses the following example of a Piland to illustrate his objection. Imagine that there exists the idea of an island which none greater can be imagine, we will call this island a Piland, if this idea of the Piland exists in the mind, then the Piland that exists in reality and in the mind is greater than just the Piland that exists in the mind, if a Piland exists only in the mind, then it is imaginable that an even greater island exists, but we by definition cannot a greater island than a Piland, a Piland is the greatest imaginable island, therefore the Piland must
1. Introduction
For the vast majority of human history our intellectual power has been directed at trying to prove the existence of gods, I will be looking at an argument for god/s existence called the Ontological argument. I will start by giving the history of this argument and how it was built, and then I will be giving my own personal opinion on the ontological argument.
2.1 What is an ontological argument?
The ontological argument is an argument that uses ontology to prove the existence of God; ontological arguments use the nature of existence to argue in favor of certain conclusions. They start with an “a priori” theory about the nature of existence, and then …show more content…
2.2.1 St. Anselm
The first of these Ontological arguments was put forward by St. Anselm in 1078 in his work the Proslogion. Anselm defined God as “the greatest possible thing that could be thought”, and argued that this being must exist in the mind even if for the purpose of refutation. He then argues that if the greatest possible being can exist as an idea then it must also exist in reality, in order for God to be the greatest possible being he must exist in both the mind and reality, if God only existed in the mind then a greater being must exist in both reality and the mind, he believed this means God must exist in reality.
The second argument he puts forward is only slightly different, God is a being that is greater than any other imaginable, a being that has the property of existence is greater than a being that does not. If God exists in the mind but not in reality, then we can imagine a greater being than god, we cannot imagine a being greater than God, so if God exists in our mind then God must exist in reality. God does exist in our mind, so he must exist in reality. A being that nothing could be greater than, cannot be conceived to not exist, this means it must …show more content…
He uses the following example of a Piland to illustrate his objection. Imagine that there exists the idea of an island which none greater can be imagine, we will call this island a Piland, if this idea of the Piland exists in the mind, then the Piland that exists in reality and in the mind is greater than just the Piland that exists in the mind, if a Piland exists only in the mind, then it is imaginable that an even greater island exists, but we by definition cannot a greater island than a Piland, a Piland is the greatest imaginable island, therefore the Piland must